TELECOM Digest     Sat, 5 Nov 2005 15:55:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 504

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    NN0 Central Office Codes (Neal McLain)
    Just Googling It Is Striking Fear Into Companies (Monty Solomon)
    Meeting Will End Fight Over Cell Tower (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Verizon POTS (Steve Sobol)
    Re: Verizon POTS (NOTvalid@XmasNYC.Info)
    Re: Verizon POTS (Tony P.)
    Re: Recorded Call From Law Office? (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Bank of America Delays Security Update (lenagainster@gmail.com)
    Re: AT&T Answering System 1309 - Need Help With Instruction (Garner Miller)
    Re: Old Chicago Numbering (Tony P.)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:42:00 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Reply-To: nmclain@annsgarden.com
Subject: NN0 Central Office Codes


A few issues back, there was a thread about NN0 codes as central
office codes.

AT&T's publication "Notes on Distance Dialing" (1975) [1] includes a
list of 63 NN0 codes that could be assigned either as area codes or as
central office codes.  This list, identified as "Chart 5," includes
all NN0 codes in the range 220-990 (except for 950 which "is reserved
for a future network-wide service") in an arbitrary (non-numerical)
order.  Each code is identified by a "sequence" number (#1 - #63).  A
copy of the list is posted at http://tinyurl.com/8csz7 .

The accompanying text states:

   2.03  Sometime after 1995, it is estimated that
   the 21 NPA codes still unassigned (end of 1974)
   will have been used and that it will be necessary
   to start using NNX type codes as NPA codes.  In
   the interest of minimizing ambiguity, it is planned
   to assign the NN0 codes first in accordance with
   the sequence shown in Chart 5.  (The NN0 codes have
   been designated as the last to be assigned as CO
   codes and a sequence that is the reverse of the of
   that for NPA code assignment is recommended.)
   Ultimately, it will become necessary to assign the
   remaining NNX codes for NPA code purposes. [2]

Notes [3] on Chart 5 clarify the order of assignment:

   Central office codes should be drawn from the
   list in sequence-number order.

   After all N0/1X area codes are exhausted, further
   area codes should be drawn from the list in
   reverse-sequence-number order.

If I understand this correctly, the idea was to assign NN0 codes as
central office codes *and* as area codes *before* the introduction of
interchangeable area codes, but to draw from opposite ends of the NN0
list in order to prevent ambiguity.  Presumably, this would have
forestalled the need for interchangeable area codes until the list was
exhausted, theoretically somewhere in the middle of the list.

It didn't work out that way ...

Many NN0 codes were assigned as central office codes whenever and
wherever they were needed, without regard to their positions on Chart 5.

  Examples that come to mind:

   702-870 (#3  on the list)  ca. 1989   Las Vegas
   312-990 (#32 on the list)  ca. 1988   Hinsdale
   201-460 (#36 on the list)  ca. 1982   Lyndhurst
   414-730 (#52 on the list)  ca. 1986   Appleton
   214-680 (#54 on the list)  ca. 1983   Dallas

I assume that one reason for selecting these combinations was an
attempt to maintain the look and feel of existing central office
codes.  That was certainly the case in Appleton, where Wisconsin
Telephone was already using several other 73X combinations as central
office codes.

Curiously (as Mark Roberts noted in TD 24:482), 530 (#1 on the list)
was in service -- at least briefly -- in California in 1965, a decade
before Chart 5 was published.  I wonder if this was just a
coincidence?  Or had some early version of Chart 5 already been
published in 1965?

No NN0 area codes were assigned before 1/1/1995 (when interchangeable
area codes were introduced), but once the floodgates were open, many
NN0 codes appeared quickly.  But they too were assigned as needed,
without regard to their positions on Chart 5.  Seven of them were
assigned [4] during 1995:

   360 (#6)   Washington
   630 (#15)  Illinois
   770 (#25)  Georgia
   540 (#29)  Virginia
   970 (#31)  Colorado
   860 (#34)  Connecticut
   520 (#61)  Arizona

Note that Washington's 360 (#6 on the list) was actually #58 in the
reverse sequence, while Arizona's 520 (#61) was actually #3 in reverse
sequence.

And, of course, all N90 combinations were reserved for future use,
even though all eight of them appear on Chart 5.  Apparently, Chart 5
had been abandoned before 1995.

I assume that a major factor in the selection of new area codes after
1/1/1995 was conflict-avoidance: avoiding conflict between an area
code and any central office code within the area code.  This would
have been a further reason for abandoning Chart 5.

Even NPA 847 obeyed this constraint when it was first assigned; 847-847 
appeared some time later.

-------- References -------------

[1] American Telephone and Telegraph Company, Engineering and Network 
Services Department, Systems Planning Section. "Notes on Distance 
Dialing," Section 2 ("Numbering Plan and Dialing Procedures"), 1975.

[2] Ibid, Section 2, p.2.

[3] Ibid, Section 2, p.17.

[4] Carl Moore: history.of.area.splits. November 2, 1995.
http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/archives/areacodes/history.area.splits.11-95

Neal McLain

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 13:07:49 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Just Googling It Is Striking Fear Into Companies


By STEVE LOHR
The New York Times
November 6, 2005

Wal-Mart, the nation's largest retailer, strikes fear into the hearts
of its competitors and suppliers. Makers of goods from diapers to
DVD's must cater to its whims. But there is one company that even
Wal-Mart eyes warily these days: Google, a seven-year-old business in
a seemingly distant industry.

"We watch Google very closely at Wal-Mart," said Jim Breyer, a member
of Wal-Mart's board.

In Google, Wal-Mart sees both a technology pioneer and the seed of a
threat, said Mr. Breyer, who is also a partner in a venture capital
firm. The worry is that by making information available everywhere,
Google might soon be able to tell Wal-Mart shoppers if better bargains
are available nearby.

Wal-Mart is scarcely alone in its concern. As Google increasingly
becomes the starting point for finding information and buying products
and services, companies that even a year ago did not see themselves as
competing with Google are beginning to view the company with some
angst - mixed with admiration.

Google's recent moves have stirred concern in industries from book
publishing to telecommunications. Businesses already feeling the
Google effect include advertising, software and the news media. Apart
from retailing, Google's disruptive presence may soon be felt in real
estate and auto sales.

Google, the reigning giant of Web search, could extend its economic
reach in the next few years as more people get high-speed Internet
service and cellphones become full-fledged search tools, according to
analysts. And ever-smarter software, they say, will cull and organize
larger and larger digital storehouses of news, images, real estate
listings and traffic reports, delivering results that are more like
the advice of a trusted human expert.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/06/technology/06google.html?ex=1288933200&en=382239f45e5a64bd&ei=5088

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 02:30:16 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Meeting Will End Fight Over Cell Tower


By Kristen Green, Globe Correspondent  |  October 30, 2005

After years of battling cellular phone companies over where they can
locate their antennas, Wayland selectmen will ask residents Tuesday to
rezone town-owned land in the Reeves Hill area as a wireless district,
which would pave the way for the first town-approved cell tower.

Officials are asking voters to approve a location specified in a legal
settlement the town reached this summer with Cingular Wireless, a
cellphone company, and Horizon Towers, a tower-building company.

The companies had taken the town to court to push their proposal to
build a tower on Boston Post Road (Route 20) near Pine Brook Road.

The zoning change requires two-thirds approval at Tuesday's Special
Town Meeting. Voters will also be asked to allow the town to lease the
property to Horizon Towers, which would construct a 180-foot cellphone
tower, replacing an existing 120-foot tower on Reeves Hill the town
uses for police and fire communications.

If voters reject the articles, the town will be required under its
settlement agreement to issue a building permit at the Route 20 site,
said Michael L. Tichnor, chairman of the Board of Selectmen, a siting
the town has fought.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/10/30/meeting_will_end_fight_over_cell_tower/

------------------------------

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Verizon POTS
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 08:46:05 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Joe wrote:

> How long does it take for Verizon to install POTS?

They installed it a week or so after I ordered it. I told them when I was 
moving in.

Apple Valley, California. Former Continental Telephone/GTE territory. YMM 
definitely V.

Did they give you an install date or a turnaround time when you placed the 
order?

Steve Sobol, Professional Geek   888-480-4638   PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

------------------------------

From: NOTvalid@XmasNYC.Info
Subject: Re: Verizon POTS
Date: 5 Nov 2005 10:29:19 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


What happens if you plug in a phone?

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s.nospam@nospam.cox.nosapm.net>
Subject: Re: Verizon POTS
Organization: Ace Tomato and Cement Co.
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 08:52:34 -0500


In article <telecom24.503.4@telecom-digest.org>, Joe@NOSPAM.SPAM says...

> How long does it take for Verizon to install POTS?

> I have moved my mother to an apartment. The complex is not new, been
> there for 10+years.  The previous tenent had Verizon POTS.  I called
> Verizon for new service on 10/27. Got a tracking number.  But it has
> been 5 business days and no telephone service.  Checked online using
> tracking number but it shows "in progress", no date.  Called customer
> support, on hold for 45min. then gave up.

> Any idea how long it takes? 

Verizon is famous for having crappy outside plant records. For
example, when I moved here in October, 2004 they swore up and down
that service was hooked up. Plug in the phone and no dial-tone. No NID
either.

So I open the terminal block, take out the butt set and start dialing
the ANAC number on every pair. Not only did I find my pair, I found
the NID for my apartment and the two weren't anywhere near each other,
nor was the NID connected.

Called Verizon and told em' it was pair 14 and I wanted it hooked to
my NID. The tech that came out had a good laugh, he said I'd stirred
up a hornets nest inside Verizon's install/repair depot. Customers are
NOT supposed to open terminal boxes.

But when said boxes are secured with 7/16" nuts, it isn't hard to get 
in. 

------------------------------

From: DevilsPGD <spamsucks@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Recorded Call From Law Office?
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 01:16:18 -0700
Organization: Disorganized


In message <telecom24.503.9@telecom-digest.org> DevilsPGD
<spamsucks@crazyhat.net> wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you are referring to the McDonalds
> at 5000 or 5100 West Dempster (Niles Center Road and Dempster, about a
> block east of the Skokie Swift station) that does not surprise me at
> all.  They got the notion once to lock down the inside eating area at
> 9 PM but keep the drive up window open until 11 PM, so at 9:10 PM I
> came walking along on foot past the drive in window to get an order. 
> The woman refused to sell to me since I was 'not in a car'.  We 
> exchanged a few words; I wound up getting an empty bag out of the
> trash can nearby and calling the McDonalds customer service  number. 
> The woman just about flipped out when she got a call from customer 
> service a couple minutes later asking her what was going on. Her
> excuse was a 'man on a bike a couple weeks earlier had robbed her and
> she was not going to take any more chances with pedestrians when the
> main dining area had been closed for the night.  Another time I was
> told they considered it 'more effecient' to be 'blackmailed' out of
> drinks rather than change their way of doing business. By comparison,
> the McDonalds here in Independence is so pleasant, even for a
> Mcdonalds place.  I am watching to see if walmart gets sued the same
> way, for using incorrectly (tax) programmed cash registers here.  PAT]

Definitely on Niles ... I think that's the right location, although
I'm not 100% sure, it's been a couple months.

It's actually not that uncommon these days for a place to have later
drive through hours then restaurant hours, especially when they have a
homeless and/or drunk problem.  Also, the refusal to service walk
through in the drive through is more of a safety issue, so that some
asshole in a car doesn't mow you down.

*shrugs*


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, it is Dempster Street and
Skokie Blvd (Cicero Avenue a few blocks south when in Chicago). Niles 
Center Road runs at an angle a few blocks west of the Skokie Swift
station. Cicero Avenue is 4800 west (as is Skokie Blvd) and the
restaurant is 4800 West Dempster on its address. 5001 Dempster is the
Skokie Swift station. The old name of the village of Skokie used to
be 'Niles Center' which is how the street by that name got its name,
and it cuts through at about 5100 west at that point. 

The parking area and the drive up window were completely abandoned at
that point in time; I had originally gone by the restaurant entrance
and saw a crew working inside there, but they waved me away saying
they were closed, 'but drive through is open until midnight'. Going
around to that side, then the rude lady waved me away saying she was 
not going to serve any pedestrians walking through.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: lenagainster@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Bank of America Delays Security Update
Date: 5 Nov 2005 07:56:26 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Robert McMillan wrote:

> The Bank of America's rollout of a stronger user authentication
> technology has hit a snag

Sure did AFAIC.  Constantly asking me my secret question and telling
me it doesn't recognize my computer.  Same computer, no changes, same
cookies.  Don't particularly care for the fact that it uses my SSN for
an ID.

It's broke, and I'm stuck with it until BOA fixes it or until I can
get all my direct deposits transferred to my other bank, where I have
easy access and don't get constantly slammed with Yahoo-like ads.  Bye
-bye BOA.

Lena

------------------------------

Subject: Re: AT&T Answering System 1309 - Need Help With Instructions
From: Garner Miller <garner@netstreet.net>
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 16:23:34 GMT
Organization: Road Runner


In article <telecom24.503.7@telecom-digest.org>, browny
<njbraun@sirisonline.com> wrote:

> I have misplaced my instructions for this unit (telephone answering
> machine).  Would like to use the REMOTE ACCESS feature and don't
> recall how.  Can anyone help me?

I dug around the AT&T web site, and found manuals for most of their
models.  They didn't have the 1309 specifically, but they did have the
1306 and several others, which *might* be close enough to get you
started.  Take a look:

http://telephones.att.com/telephones_ui/support/dsp_manuals_list.cfm#257

Garner R. Miller
Clifton Park, NY =USA=
http://www.garnermiller.com/

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s.nospam@nospam.cox.nosapm.net>
Subject: Re: Old Chicago Numbering
Organization: Ace Tomato and Cement Co.
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 08:46:02 -0500


In article <telecom24.499.15@telecom-digest.org>, JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com 
says:

> On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:43:17 -0500, Tony P.
> <kd1s.nospam@nospam.cox.nosapm.net> wrote:

>> I do recall that they really stretched out the cutovers. My
>> grandparents house in Providence still had the old style call progress
>> tones indicating they were still on the Panel until 1975 or so. The CO
>> for most of Providence is a huge building -- at least 14 floors that
>> were once filled with switching gear. Now it's just the 4th floor. The
>> rest of the building is offices.

> I was in Providence in 1978 and my recollection is that they had mixed
> ESS, panel and #1XB all working right next to each other.  Another
> interesting thing about Providence is evidently Providence was a 2L 4N
> city originally since many of the exchanges in Providence have a one
> after them like PLantations 1, ELmhurst 1 and so on.

Yes I believe it did but in my time we had 7 digit. The only phone I'd
ever seen with 2L1-4N was my grandparents 554 set. JAckson-1-4937. But
I've seen old advertising materials for the Providence area that has
2L-4N numbers on it.

Very interesting -- I knew that Panel an ESS were in existence at the 
same time but wasn't aware of the #1XB. 

------------------------------


TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecomm-
unications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as
Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums.  It is
also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup
'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

RSS Syndication of TELECOM Digest: http://telecom-digest.org/rss.html
  For syndication examples see http://www.feedrollpro.com/syndicate.php?id=308
    and also http://feeds.feedburner.com/TelecomDigest

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************

Visit http://www.mstm.okstate.edu and take the next step in your
career with a Master of Science in Telecommunications Management
(MSTM) degree from Oklahoma State University (OSU). This 35
credit-hour interdisciplinary program is designed to give you the
skills necessary to manage telecommunications networks, including
data, video, and voice networks.

The MSTM degree draws on the expertise of the OSU's College
of Business Administration; the College of Arts and Sciences; and the
College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. The program has
state-of-the-art lab facilities on the Stillwater and Tulsa campus
offering hands-on learning to enhance the program curriculum.  Classes
are available in Stillwater, Tulsa, or through distance learning.

Please contact Jay Boyington for additional information at
405-744-9000, mstm-osu@okstate.edu, or visit the MSTM web site at
http://www.mstm.okstate.edu

              ************************

   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V24 #504
******************************